The Obama administration’s concessions to Iran — and
Tehran’s aggression against the United States — continue.

On October 7, the Treasury Department loosenedrestrictions
on Iran’s ability to trade with U.S. dollars, a step the July 2015 nuclear
deal in no way requires. On October 9 and 12, Iran-backed Houthi rebels firedmissiles at
the USS Mason, an American Arleigh Burke-class destroyer, off the
coast of Yemen. prompting the vessel to retaliate by destroying Houthi
radar installations. These two events are a telling metaphor for U.S.-Iranian
relations since the nuclear accord: As Washington strives to accommodate
Tehran’s evolving economic demands, the regime’s belligerence increases.

According to the Treasury Department, the latest American
allowances permit foreign
financial institutions to process transactions denominated in U.S. dollars, and
reverse longstanding U.S. policy prohibiting foreign companies from conducting
business with an entity “that is minority owned, or that is controlled in
whole or in part, by an Iranian or Iran-related person” on the U.S. sanctions
list. Washington also no longer expects foreign banks “to repeat the due
diligence its customers have performed on an Iranian customer unless” they
have “reason to believe that those processes are insufficient.”

These concessions will enable the economic growth and
illicit financial practices of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), the
regime’s praetorian guard. The IRGC manages Iran’s nuclear and ballistic
missile programs, bears responsibility for many of its human rights abuses, and
spearheads its expansionary ambitions throughout the Middle East. Dubbed by
the Treasury Department as Iran’s “most powerful economic actor,” the IRGC controls as
much as 40 percent of Iran’s economy, giving the organization enormous
political and domestic influence.

Last year, the Obama administration repeatedly and
explicitly pledged to
refrain from offering Iran direct or indirect access the dollar — a
restriction it presented as an effective method, in the wake of the nuclear
deal’s lifting of international sanctions, to combat the regional instability
that the IRGC fosters. At the same time, President Obama said in
an August 2015 letter that the United States “will maintain powerful
sanctions” that address Iran’s “destabilizing role in Yemen,” among
other misbehavior, and will “deploy new sanctions to address those continuing
concerns, which we fully intend to do when circumstances warrant.”

The administration also promised that it would enforce the
U.N. Security Council’s injunction on Iranian support for the Houthis. “Iran
is not allowed to send weapons to the Houthi in Yemen,” Secretary of State
John Kerry said days
after the nuclear deal’s finalization in July 2015. “There’s another U.N.
resolution about that. It has to be enforced. So we are going to engage with
others in making sure that we hold Iran accountable to standards that it must be
expected to live up to.”

Nevertheless, the Obama administration has remained largely
passive as Iran continued to ship arms to Houthi rebels. Since September 2015,
U.S. navy ships or allied forces have intercepted at
least fourweapons-laden Iranian ships bound for
Yemen. In April 2016, in response to the latest interdiction, White House Press
Secretary Josh Earnest declared that
Iran’s behavior “is not at all consistent with U.N. Security Council
resolutions,” and that America and its international partners “will take a
close look at this incident, consider the available evidence, and if and when
it’s appropriate, raise this for other members of the [U.N.] Security
Council.” To date, however, the council has yet to consider the issue.

In this context, the new American concessions are further
evidence that the administration, for the remainder of its term, has no
intention of fulfilling its promises. Likewise, by enabling the IRGC to access
the dollar and thereby weakening the non-nuclear sanctions architecture, the
U.S. move constricts the ability of President Obama’s successor to impose
economic penalties on Iran for its terrorism, human rights abuses, and ballistic
missile tests.

Most troublingly, Washington’s refusal to challenge
Iranian antagonism has emboldened Tehran’s Yemeni proxies to open a new front
that directly threatens the lives of American sailors. Last week, the Pentagoninsisted that
it has no interest in assuming a greater role in the increasingly
bloody Saudi-led war in Yemen, which Washington has reluctantly
supported by providing fuel and intelligence. But continued Houthi attacks risk
forcing America’s hand.

On Sunday, the U.S. Navy said it
was investigating a possible third missile attack against the USS Mason,
suggesting that its earlier response was insufficient to discourage the Houthis.
This followed Tehran’sannouncement last
week that it had sent a flotilla of warships to Yemen’s southern coast in an
ostensible effort to deter further U.S. action against the rebels. The Obama
administration has not shown that it has a coherent strategy to respond to these
developments.

Iran’s strategy, by contrast, appears to be self-evident:
Tehran and its proxies view the waning days of the Obama administration as an
opportunity to pursue their interests with impunity. President Obama, the regime
probably reasons, would hardly
seek to escalate tensions with Iran, thereby threatening the nuclear
deal, his signature foreign policy achievement, just as he leaves office. The
next administration will suffer the consequences of this approach, taking power
with fewer non-military options to counter Iranian aggression.